BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions >> Makai v R. [2007] EWCA Crim 1652 (11 July 2007) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2007/1652.html Cite as: [2007] EWCA Crim 1652 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE CROWN COURT OF WOLVERHAMPTON
HIS HONOUR JUDGE WEBB
T20067008
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
MRS JUSTICE DOBBS
and
MR JUSTICE LLOYD JONES
____________________
Atilla Makai |
Appellant |
|
- and - |
||
Regina |
Respondent |
____________________
John Butterfield (instructed by Birmingham, Crown Prosecution Service) for the Respondent
Hearing date : 20 June 2007
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Lord Justice Pill :
"In this case the nature of the immigration assistance was first of all to inform the prostitutes that the easiest way of entering the country was via Ireland, and then to instruct them to fill in their immigration forms with the false information that the purpose for which they were entering the country was tourism. They were then provided with visas to enter the country on that basis. Most of them left before those visas expired. However, instead of spending their time in this country in innocent tourism, they spent their time working as prostitutes. They then returned home, so that there was no long-term increase of illegal immigrants in this country, and indeed never more than four or five at a time as a result of the applicants' activities. It seems to us that the immigration offence was part and parcel of the trafficking offence and, of course, it aggravated that offence.
The remaining elements of the trafficking offence lacked most of the aggravating factors identified by the Sentencing Guidelines Council. There was no deception or coercion. There was assistance for prostitutes who wanted to come to this country – assistance with their entering the country illegally and organisation of their business while they were here on a substantial scale and for a substantial profit."
A total sentence of 5 years imprisonment was considered appropriate in the case of Zammit and 4 years in the case of Delgado-Fernandez, who was very much under the control of Zammit.
"We have compared the facts of this case with those in Roci. Although here there was the single case of coercion, the picture in Roci is of a much more rigid regime of exploitation, albeit lacking the gravity of the single aggravating feature that we have to deal with. Overall we consider that the two cases are comparable and that the appropriate starting point in this case should have been ten years. From that starting point there fell to be a full reduction for the guilty plea, and then there was the further reduction made by the judge to reflect personal mitigation. Initially we were sceptical as to its justification. However, we are told that the applicant's wife, whose life expectancy is very limited, has returned to Malaysia where she is likely to die in circumstance where the applicant will not see her again.
In these circumstances, have regard to that item of mitigation and to the principle of double jeopardy, we have reached the conclusion that while this was a lenient sentence, it did not amount to a sentence that was unduly lenient so that it should be increased. For that reason we propose to leave the sentence as it stands."
"The offences are designed to cover anyone involved in any stage of the trafficking operation, whether or not there is evidence of gain. This is serious offending behaviour, which society as a whole finds repugnant, and a financial or community penalty would rarely be an appropriate disposal.
The degree of coercion used and the level of control over the trafficked person's liberty will be relevant to assessing the seriousness of the offender's behaviour. The nature of the sexual exploitation to which the victim is exposed will also be relevant, as will the victim's age and vulnerability.
In general terms the greater the level of involvement, the more serious the crime. Those at the top of an organised trafficking chain may have very little personal involvement with day-today operations and may have no knowledge at all of individual victims. However, being in control of a money-making operation that is based on the degradation, exploitation and abuse of vulnerable people may be equally, if not more, serious than the actions of an individual who is personally involved at an operational level."
……
"The starting point for sentencing for offences of trafficking for sexual exploitation should be a custodial sentence. Aggravating factors such as participation in a large-scale commercial enterprise involving a high degree of planning, organisation or sophistication, financial or other gain, and the coercion and vulnerability of victims should move sentences towards the maximum 14 years."